If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: al-Zaraqwi reportedly captured in Iraq

Let me ask a military question...

... is it better to defeat an enemy by eliminating them from the bottom to the top -or- from the top to the bottom?

I'll give you the answer... the latter of the two. Have I been to West Point or anything like West Point? No. I have studied war though. I am not surprised that some would see the glass as 1/2 empty if this story were true. That is the political nature of the beast.

Leaders make decisions. Leaders know more about an entire army (theirs and their enemy), organization or felonious killing machine (this is a good description for al qaeda). Leaders provide emotional support. Their presence means a lot to those who fight under them. It is always a greta thing to nab a top-dog. For instance, some may know this story...

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
Having lived and studied previously in the United States (Harvard grad), Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto of the Imperial Japanese Navy was not eager to enter into war with that county. Ordered into combat by his country, Yamamoto was the most reluctant of warriors who seemed to know that it was his destiny to fight and die for his Emperor in a lost cause.

One of the great advantages that the United States enjoyed in its war with Japan was the cracking of the Japanese code. This gave the U.S. advanced warning of impending Japanese operations. One such operation was a visit by Admiral Yamamoto to the Japanese base on Bougainvillea. Allied intelligence intercepted and decoded a message describing the visit, and the 13th Air Force decided to welcome him. Even the highest ranking American military commanders felt that to give a direct order to assassinate an enemy commander was above them, and the authorization for the mission eventually came all the way down from the office of the American presidency. On April 18, 1943, one year to the day after the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo, 18 American P-38s from the 13th Air Force launched from Guadalcanal, flew to Bougainvillea, found the Admiral's flight, and shot down his plane killing him.

Admiral Yamamoto’s death was a tragic blow to Japanese morale. Many commanders felt that they had lost Japan’s greatest naval strategist, a realization to which several commanders would never recover from.

Re: al-Zaraqwi reportedly captured in Iraq

I don't want Osama Bin Laden captured because I think it'll make Iraq a better situation. I want him captured, tried, and executed because he murdered 3,000 Americans on 9/11.

He didn't personally murder them. But the terrorist organization he fronts/heads did.

Isn't that also what Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi's network/organization is doing in Iraq? How many thousands of lives (coalition forces and the innocent) has he taken?

But doing so isn't going to do much when it comes to Iraq, and it probably wouldn't do much with regards to terrorism either. There's always going to be someone else to step into a leadership role.

You don't know that it's not gonna be effective in putting a hurt on the insurgency. Any time you can capture/take out a terrorist leader you have to do it. It sure doesn't hurt the situation.

You start wiping out the leadership, and sooner or later the soldiers will get demoralized and scatter.

You are damaging their organizational structure and chain of command. Sure someone else may step in. But are they gonna be as effective, and provide the leadership that is desperately needed? You're forcing "utility" players to now take on the role of leadership.

If we had lost some of our generals during WW2, such as Ike, Patton, Clark, McArthur, do you think it could have set us back and hurt our cause?

Any time you lose an instrumental leader it helps your cause while setting the opposition back.

Re: al-Zaraqwi reportedly captured in Iraq

I don't think a draft is going to happen. I think Bush is going to have his "election" Jan 30th and declare democracy has won out in Iraq and than pull the troops. Call it cut and run. The other option, which is pretty successful is to go to poor countries and recruit for the US Military. They are paying foreignors huge bonus (well, huge to them) to join the military. I don't have a problem with this. I do have a problem of miltary age Americans who are hawks for the war in Iraq, but they feel they have better things to do than help fight it.

Originally Posted by Steve4192

I'm still waiting for the draft to be reinstated right after the election. That dire prediction is looking more spurrious by the day.

US Army reserves a broken force: top general
January 7, 2005

The US Army Reserve is unable to meet its missions in Iraq and Afghanistan because of "dysfunctional" personnel policies that army and Pentagon officials have refused to change.

The Reserve commander, Lieutenant-General James Helmly, wrote in a memorandum to the army chief-of-staff, General Peter Schoomaker, that the part-time corps is "rapidly degenerating into a broken force".

The memo, dated December 20, and first reported in The Baltimore Sun on Wednesday, is unusually blunt. It says the Reserves are not able to carry out the present mission under current personnel rules.

"The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you of the Army Reserve's inability .. to meet mission requirements associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom and to reset and regenerate its forces for follow-on and future missions," it said, referring to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

While that alone "is of great importance", the memo said, the Reserves are "in grave danger of being unable to meet other operational requirements", including those specified in other emergency plans in the US and abroad.

General Helmly's memo comes as further evidence of the strain being felt by large sections of the military - especially the Reserves and National Guard - over the US military commitment in Iraq.

Reservists and National Guard troops make up about 40 per cent of the US force in Iraq, a percentage that will increase when troop rotation over the next months is complete. Both have suffered recruitment shortfalls because of Iraq.
Reserve and Guard troops have sued the Pentagon to avoid deployments and have baulked at orders in expressions of frustration that culminated last month in a verbal confrontation between a National Guard soldier and the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, in Kuwait over the adequacy of armour protection for troops deploying to Iraq.

But General Helmly's memo represents blistering criticism from a top commander, and the Reserve chief cited a number of Pentagon policies and decisions that have harmed reservist morale and strained family lives.

Besides unpopular last-minute extensions of Iraq deployments, the memo criticised the lack of planning for the Iraqi insurgency, which resulted in 8000 soldiers being remobilised and sent back to Iraq just three months after returning to civilian life.

There are about 52,000 Army Reserve soldiers on active duty, with 17,000 in Iraq and 2000 in Afghanistan.

The general also expressed concern that the Pentagon has made it a common practice to use cash bonuses as incentives for army reservists.

"We must consider the point at which we confuse 'volunteer to become an American soldier' with 'mercenary'," General Helmly wrote. "Use of pay to induce 'volunteerism' will cause the expectation of always receiving such financial incentives in future conflicts."

In response to General Helmly's memo, army officials said they were working to address the concerns he raised, and said some of the problems raised were being corrected.

Re: al-Zaraqwi reportedly captured in Iraq

"We must consider the point at which we confuse 'volunteer to become an American soldier' with 'mercenary'," General Helmly wrote. "Use of pay to induce 'volunteerism' will cause the expectation of always receiving such financial incentives in future conflicts."

That's a really interesting point.

We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
--Oscar Wilde

Re: al-Zaraqwi reportedly captured in Iraq

Reserve and Guard troops have sued the Pentagon to avoid deployments and have baulked at orders in expressions of frustration that culminated last month in a verbal confrontation between a National Guard soldier and the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, in Kuwait over the adequacy of armour protection for troops deploying to Iraq.

Military people sue the Pentagon?!?! Excuse me for asking, but... is deployment to "do what you are trained to do" a reason to sue. Who sued? The article doesn't point this out too clearly... almost as if we are to believe that thousands of lawsuits are being filed. So the Nat'l Guard and the Reserves are just for fun and a way to make money (paid by the taxpayers of this country)? Gee, learn something new everyday.

Can I sue my company if they make me do another profit-n-loss statement for perspective business? I guess so. OH WAIT... just noticed the NY Times thing at the bottom of the article. That explains it!

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball